Effective communication? (Was: Re: Origin of PC terms)

[Matt Ion <mion -at- DIRECT -dot- CA>]

On Fri, 9 Jun 1995 09:54:32 CDT you wrote:

>> And THIS, IMHO, should be a part of the credo of this group.  We are
 TECHNICAL
>> writers.  Technical issues should be the primary consideration of our
>> writings.  We should be careful not to offend, of course, but we cannot
>> concentrate on effective technical writing when we are so concerned with who
>> may or may not be pissed off with all the various connotations they care to
>> read into our every word.
>>
>On the contrary, as technical writers, how our words might be perceived should
> be paramount in our minds, if for no other reason that saving our companies'
> collective behinds (and therefore our own).

The point is, that such concern over being "inoffensive" should not be the
focus.  Yes, words should be carefully chosen for their effectiveness... but
how can you get the point across when your primary worry is whether or not
someone will take offence at something you write down?

Remember, no matter HOW carefully you choose your words, SOMEone out there
will find something "offensive" in them if that's what they're looking for
(like hearing satanic messages in "Stairway to Heaven" - I never heard a thing
until someone said, "see, right here they're saying blah blah blah).

So.  Do you spend all your time and sweat making sure there's absolutely
nothing that anyone could possibly be offended by?  Or do you do your
level-headed best to not purposely offend, and concentrate on saying just what
you need to say?

> Another example: this company decided
> not to use a term then prevalent in the computer industry--abort (as in "Press
> Escape to abort")--because of the controversial connotations of the term.

That's the equivalent of someone deciding that I shouldn't be called a "man"
because of the negative connotations the word has for some (a very few)
people.  It's just plain silly.

Anyone got an OED handy?  Care to quote the definition of "abort"?  Seems to
me it's a very good word for the usage described above.  And now it shouldn't
be used in exactly the form it was meant to be used because a few people view
it as having a negative connotation?

Sorry, and all due respect to Eric's posting on the marginal relevance of PC
to this group, but this is exactly WHY the Language Police are a problem, and
WHY it is relevant here.  At this rate, it will be impossible to effectively
communicate anything in the English language.

What's next?  Will I be writing a computer manual and not be able to use the
term "floppy drive" because it might offend "sexually dysfuntional men"?

>A good rule of thumb then: Know who your audience is, and don't piss them off
> (to use your colorful wording). They're keeping you in a job.

Knowing your audience is critical to any technical writing, regardless of
whether or not you're concerned about being PC.

Then again, considering the general stereotype of the your typical "computer
geek," my example above speaks for itself...




 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Opinions expressed      /         ROCK-IT SCIENCE Mobile Audio and Security
 do not necessarily     /| ...the   1040 MIDI & Music BBS Technical Services
 reflect those of any  [ SOUNDMAN   Internet mion -at- direct -dot- ca  Fido 1:153/7106
 marginally sane human  \|             WWW http://www.musicwest.com/1040bbs/
 being anywhere.         \         FAX: (604)253-8312    DATA: (604)732-4446
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------